Report: Amazon’s next Kindle Paperwhite will pick up a 300 PPI screen

Breaking news: new version of product to improve on current version of product.

Amazon's Kindle Fire HDX tablets have already broken the 300 PPI barrier, but the sharpest of its E Ink readers sits at a much lower 212 PPI. According to a report from TechCrunch's Matthew Panzarino, that may be about to change—Amazon is apparently working on a new version of its backlit Kindle Paperwhite with a 300 PPI display of an unspecified size and resolution. Since E Ink screens are meant to mimic the printed page, a sharper screen would bring the e-reader that much closer to the experience of reading an actual book.

While the new e-reader is still apparently "several months away," we know a little more about its other planned features. On the hardware side, Amazon will reportedly be adding an ambient light sensor to adjust the device's frontlight based on the light in the room you're in, and hardware buttons for page turning will be making a return (the current Paperwhite relies on touch input for page turning). On the software side, the device's UI will of course be upscaled to take advantage of the high-density screen, and Amazon will be introducing some new fonts and other tweaks to improve the Kindle's typography. Finally, the new Paperwhite's design will be tweaked to bring it more in line with that of the newest Fire tablets.

Amazon isn't the first to bring a high-density e-reader to market. Kobo's Aura HD has a 265 PPI, 6.8-inch screen and has been out since May, though Kobo is a bigger presence in its home country of Canada than it is in the US. (The Aura HD was supposedly a limited-edition product, but it's still on sale for $170 six months later so it's clearly not that limited.) The newest Paperwhite will however be the first E Ink reader of this density with access to Amazon's gigantic e-book library and the Kindle brand, two potent weapons in the battle for e-book market supremacy.

Even the Kobo Aura HD's ppi is so much more than is really needed (even the Glo's lower-spec screen already looked sufficiently great) that I doubt the 300 ppi is being used out of need rather than coming out on top from a specs-war perspective. All I know is that I never had a Kobo fail on me, but 2 Kindle e-readers were unceremoniously retired by family members due to breaking on them.

The eInk Kindles have all had 4:3 screens. The best fit with normal resolutions is 1400x1050, 6", and only 292 DPI (300 DPI would require shrinking to 5.83"). 1600x1200 would be 333 DPI at 6" and I'd expect them to trumpet the higher number if that was the case. Alternately 1600x1200 would be exactly 300 DPI at 6.67"; if Amazon was willing to go for either a larger form factor or tiny bezels.

I just wish they'd get the reflectivity of the "white" section up a tad (which is to say a lot) higher. The pixel density is not what's keeping me from buying one of these devices it's the contrast ratio between text and no text.

Statistics and higher numbers are great, but the current paperwhite is fine for reading books. 300 PPI for E Ink shouldn't make a huge difference. Of course, I might be typing this because I'm upset that I just bought a paperwhite a month ago!

Breaking news: new version of product to improve on current version of product.

This made me laugh, but what's funnier is that Ars articles on new iPads/iPhones would never take such an irreverent approach. (Unless I've missed some, in which case someone will surely point them out.)

The resolution bump might not be a huge deal, but bringing back physical page turn buttons (on the high end model)...that is actually newsworthy. Old school Kindle readers have been asking for this since they obsoleted the Keyboard. Will have to see how well they are implemented. Might be about time to upgrade my Kindle Keyboard...

The Paperwhite is by far the best die-hard reading device. Amazon should spruce up the web browser to make it more useful for emergency usage. Due to display restrictions it'll never match up to a smartphone like experience but a slight improvement would be welcome.

I wouldn't say its exactly hidden, but it's true the percentage of included books doesn't seem to be large. I just navigated to books, picked a category, then it was one of the featured links on the side. I'd already gone mostly to on sale Kindle books already (or cheap used books elsewhere), so hasn't affected me much either way.

It came up for me and after buying hundreds of books on Amazon over the years, the only matches were for Kindle versions of a handful of Discworld mass market paperbacks for $2.00/ea. Which I of course bought, but I admit those weren't what I was hoping to see.

To me, the biggest disappointment of the program is that it doesn't go the other way around. I wouldn't mind picking up discount dead tree editions of some of the books I bought on Kindle, particularly technical references.

It may be that most of the value of that program will be in the future, when buying a book and "both" is an option.

Slightly off topic - has anyone used the Kindle Match program yet? I saw an article on Ars a while back, but haven't heard anything since.

I was checking the Matchbook link regularly and it is live. The downside is not all of the books I've purchased are included in the program. Only 23 out of the many books I've bought are good for the deal. It seems to be publisher related as all O'Reilly and Harper books are included so far. I think Amazon is having to convince the other publishers that this will lead to more sales...

Slightly off topic - has anyone used the Kindle Match program yet? I saw an article on Ars a while back, but haven't heard anything since.

Match only tossed out two books for me when it went live. I bought one of them. Hoping publishers finally get on board with this, but not holding my breath.

I had 5 show up (and I bought one). Sadly others by the same author (Sanderson) aren't showing up. And that's with him doing his own version of that for the books in the past (email a picture of you with the book and get the ebook free).

The eInk Kindles have all had 4:3 screens. The best fit with normal resolutions is 1400x1050, 6", and only 292 DPI (300 DPI would require shrinking to 5.83"). 1600x1200 would be 333 DPI at 6" and I'd expect them to trumpet the higher number if that was the case. Alternately 1600x1200 would be exactly 300 DPI at 6.67"; if Amazon was willing to go for either a larger form factor or tiny bezels.

The Aura HD mentioned above is 1440x1080. At 6", that is exactly 300dpi.

I imagine it's a similar (if not the same) screen slightly shrunk down to fit the Kindle as the price came down on the PPI side of things.

But personally I'm really interested in the buttons making a return, any time I've looked at an ereader I've found two things, the page going completely black is really annoying and fingerprints are really annoying. Some back mounted buttons could be great though and easy to use.

Meaning I'd be able to use Google Play, the Kindle app, and most importantly FBReader (which I mostly use currently and where I have all my bookmarks and notes).

The Nook Simple Touch can be rooted, but isn't that great. I think it's Eclair or Froyo (2.1 or 2.2) and is really slow. You can usa an older apk of the kindle app, but the newer versions don't run. There'a a way to get the play store on it too.

Breaking news: new version of product to improve on current version of product.

This made me laugh, but what's funnier is that Ars articles on new iPads/iPhones would never take such an irreverent approach. (Unless I've missed some, in which case someone will surely point them out.)

I think the Paper White should be free at this point. It's cool but how many people are going to get one if they already have a tablet? I know it's better on your eyes, but even the people I know who have bad eyesight don't seem that concerned.

How much do you read?

Sure, I read some on my phone or tablet, but I definitely prefer e-ink for reading in large chunks. I see a difference after a marathon reading session.